The fate of Lindsay Clancy is now in the hands of the jury. After three days of deliberations, jurors have yet to reach a verdict in the closely watched murder trial.
Jurors began deliberating Thursday, August 27, after more than five weeks of testimony in Plymouth Superior Court. Deliberations are expected to resume Tuesday.
Clancy has pleaded not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility in the January 2023 deaths of her three children — 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson and 8-month-old Callan.
The 36-year-old former labor and delivery nurse's defense does not dispute that she caused the children's deaths. Instead, the central question is whether she was criminally responsible for her actions at the time.
Her attorneys argue that she was suffering from severe postpartum psychosis, along with other serious mental-health problems, and that she was experiencing a break from reality when she strangled her children with exercise bands before attempting to take her own life. The suicide attempt left her paralyzed.
Prosecutors have presented a very different picture. They acknowledge Clancy had significant mental-health problems, but argue that she nevertheless understood what she was doing and deliberately carried out the killings. Prosecutors have pointed to her actions before and during the killings as evidence of planning and control, including arranging for her husband to leave the home.
So what happens next?
The six possible outcomes for Lindsay Clancy
Technically, the jury has five substantive verdict choices for each child's death. A sixth possibility is that jurors cannot reach unanimous agreement, resulting in a hung jury and potentially a mistrial.
1. Not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility
This is the outcome at the center of the defense case.
The jury could determine that Clancy was suffering from a mental disease or defect so severe that she was unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions or unable to conform her conduct to the law.
That would not necessarily mean Clancy walks out of court.
A finding of lack of criminal responsibility can result in commitment to a state psychiatric facility. Her confinement could potentially last for years, and her eventual release would depend on future evaluations and whether authorities determine she is no longer a danger to herself or others.
In other words, an insanity-based acquittal is not the same thing as being declared mentally healthy and immediately released.
2. Not guilty
A traditional acquittal is another possible outcome. For that to happen, jurors would have to conclude that prosecutors failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. That is different from finding Clancy not criminally responsible because of mental illness.
The defense has acknowledged that Clancy caused the children's deaths, however, making the central battle in the courtroom her mental state and criminal responsibility rather than whether she was physically responsible for what happened.
3. Guilty of first-degree murder
This would be the most severe criminal outcome.
If convicted of first-degree murder, Clancy would face a mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Jurors would have to reject the defense's argument that she lacked criminal responsibility and find that the legal requirements for first-degree murder were proven. The verdict would be considered separately for each child.
4. Guilty of second-degree murder
The jury could instead find Clancy guilty of second-degree murder.
That would mean jurors concluded she was criminally responsible for the killings but did not find the circumstances necessary for first-degree murder.
Second-degree murder carries a life sentence, but unlike first-degree murder, parole is potentially available after the applicable period.
5. Guilty of manslaughter
Manslaughter is the least severe homicide conviction available to the jury.
A manslaughter verdict would mean jurors concluded Clancy was criminally responsible for the children's deaths but that the prosecution had not established the requirements for murder.
In Massachusetts, manslaughter carries a maximum sentence of 20 years for each conviction. A judge would determine the actual sentence and whether sentences would run concurrently or consecutively.
6. Hung jury — no verdict
There is also the possibility that jurors simply cannot agree.
A criminal jury must reach a unanimous verdict. If the jurors remain deadlocked, the judge could ultimately declare a mistrial.
That would not be the same as an acquittal. Prosecutors could decide whether to try Clancy again.
For now, there is no indication that the jury is deadlocked. In fact, jurors have been working through an enormous amount of evidence: testimony from roughly 85 witnesses and hundreds of exhibits. During deliberations, they have also asked to review physical evidence, including Clancy's prescription medication bottles and the knife involved in her suicide attempt.
What is Lindsay Clancy's State of Mind as She Waits?
Clancy's attorney, Kevin Reddington, has repeatedly described his client as frightened and emotionally exhausted as the jury considers her fate.
On Friday, Reddington said Clancy was "nervous" and "very sad, scared," adding that she had felt that way since the killings. He also acknowledged that the prospect of a verdict — and potentially three life sentences — was terrifying.
On Monday, as deliberations resumed for a third day, Reddington said he felt "typical, nervous" about the outcome and said he believed everyone wanted the trial to be over. He also criticized media coverage of Clancy and the discussion of her reported symptoms.
Reddington has stopped short of predicting what the jury will do. On Friday, he said he was "never confident" because, ultimately, he could not know what the jurors would decide.
Where the Trial Stands
The trial has lasted roughly five weeks and featured more than 80 witnesses.
The defense's case has centered on Clancy's deteriorating mental health following the birth of Callan in May 2022. Her attorneys argued that she experienced postpartum psychosis and that medications prescribed during her treatment contributed to her deterioration. One of the defense's most prominent witnesses, forensic psychiatrist Dr. Phillip Resnick, testified that Clancy was "frankly psychotic" at the time of the killings.
The prosecution countered with experts who said Clancy remained criminally responsible. Their argument focused heavily on her behavior before the killings and what they described as deliberate, organized actions.
Prosecutors argued that Clancy arranged circumstances that gave her time alone with the children and then carried out the killings in a methodical manner. They also challenged her account that a voice commanded her to kill her children and herself, arguing that she understood what she was doing.
Her husband, Patrick Clancy, also testified. The case has included extensive evidence about Clancy's mental-health treatment, medications, communications with family and medical professionals, the events inside the Duxbury home and her suicide attempt immediately afterward.
The Key Question for Jurors
Ultimately, this case is not simply about whether Lindsay Clancy killed her children. She has acknowledged that she did.
The decisive question is what was happening in her mind when she did it — and whether her mental state legally excused her from criminal responsibility.
The prosecution says Clancy was severely depressed but retained control over her actions and deliberately planned the killings.
The defense says she was in the grip of postpartum psychosis, experiencing delusions and a profound break from reality that left her unable to understand the wrongfulness of what she was doing.
After three days of deliberations, 12 jurors — nine women and three men — have not yet resolved that question.
For now, the courthouse remains in verdict-watch mode, with the jury scheduled to continue deliberating Tuesday.
Why Isn't There a Lindsay Clancy Verdict Yet?
The jury has now completed three days of deliberations without reaching a verdict.
That does not necessarily mean jurors are deadlocked or that they are leaning toward one side. The case involves three separate murder charges, multiple possible verdicts and a central question about Clancy's mental state at the time of the killings.
Jurors have been asked to work through weeks of testimony and hundreds of pieces of evidence, including extensive psychiatric testimony. During deliberations, they have also asked to review physical evidence, including prescription medications and the knife Clancy used in her suicide attempt.
The jury is required to reach a unanimous verdict. For now, there is no indication that jurors are unable to agree; they are scheduled to continue deliberating Tuesday.
How Long Can a Jury Deliberate?
There is no set deadline for a Massachusetts jury to reach a verdict.
Jurors can deliberate for as long as necessary to consider the evidence and attempt to reach a unanimous decision. Massachusetts law requires a unanimous verdict in a criminal case, and if jurors ultimately cannot agree, the judge can declare a mistrial.
That means there is no way to predict when the Lindsay Clancy jury will finish. They could reach a verdict Tuesday, or deliberations could continue for considerably longer.
The fact that jurors have already spent more than 17 hours deliberating does not, by itself, indicate whether they are leaning toward conviction, acquittal or a finding that Clancy was not criminally responsible. The complexity of the case — including three victims, multiple possible verdicts and conflicting psychiatric testimony — gives jurors a significant amount to consider.
Has the Lindsay Clancy Trial Ended?
The trial itself has ended, but the case is not over. Closing arguments have been completed, Judge William Sullivan has instructed the jury on the law, and the 12 jurors are now deliberating.
Once the jury reaches a unanimous verdict, the verdict will be read in court. If jurors cannot agree, the judge could eventually declare a mistrial, potentially opening the door to a retrial.
Who Is Patrick Clancy?
Patrick Clancy is Lindsay Clancy's husband and the father of the three children she is accused of killing.
He has been a central figure in the case from the beginning. On January 24, 2023, Patrick left the family's Duxbury home to pick up food. When he returned, he discovered his children and Lindsay, who had attempted suicide after the killings.
Patrick called 911 and later became an important witness in the prosecution's case.
But his role in the trial has been more complicated than that of a traditional prosecution witness. Patrick has publicly expressed forgiveness toward Lindsay and has said he does not believe she intended to harm their children before her severe mental-health crisis. He testified about Lindsay's behavior, mental-health struggles and the events surrounding the killings, giving jurors a firsthand account of their family life and the days leading up to the tragedy.
His testimony has been considered alongside the competing accounts from psychiatric experts, who disagree sharply about whether Lindsay was experiencing postpartum psychosis and whether that condition made her legally incapable of being held responsible for the killings.
If you or someone you know is considering suicide, please contact the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline by dialing 988, text "988" to the Crisis Text Line at 741741 or go to 988lifeline.org.
Contact Newsweek editors on this story: Samantha Beech and Gray R. Thomas